Mishna - Mas. Hallah Chapter 1
Mishna - Mas. Hallah Chapter 1
MISHNAH 1. FIVE SPECIES [OF CEREALS] ARE SUBJECT TO [THE LAW OF] HALLAH.
1
WHEAT, BARLEY, SPELT, OATS AND RYE.
2
THESE ARE SUBJECT TO HALLAH, AND[SMALL QUANTITIES OF DOUGH MADE OF THE DIFFERENT SPECIES] ARE RECKONEDTOGETHER ONE WITH ANOTHER [AS ONE QUANTITY]
3
AND ARE ALSO SUBJECT TOTHE PROHIBITION OF [THE CONSUMPTION OF] ‘NEW’ [PRODUCE]
4
PRIOR TO THEOMER,
5
AND TO [THE PROHIBITION OF] REAPING PRIOR TO PASSOVER.
6
IF THEYTOOK ROOT PRIOR TO THE OMER, THE OMER RELEASES THEM;
7
IF NOT, THEY AREPROHIBITED UNTIL THE NEXT OMER HAS COME. MISHNAH 2. IF ONE HAS EATEN ON THE PASSOVER AN OLIVE-SIZE
8
OFUNLEAVENED BREAD [MADE] OF THESE [CEREALS], HE HAS FULFILLED HISOBLIGATION;
9
[IF ONE HAS EATEN ON THE PASSOVER] AN OLIVE-SIZE OF LEAVEN[MADE OF THESE CEREALS], HE HAS INCURRED THE PENALTY OF KARETH.
10
IF ONEOF THESE [CEREALS, HAVING BECOME LEAVENED,] HAS BECOME MIXED WITH ANYOTHER SPECIES, ONE TRANSGRESSES THE [LAWS OF] PASSOVER.
11
IF ONE HASVOWED [TO ABSTAIN] FROM [CONSUMING] BREAD AND TEBU'AH [(CEREAL)PRODUCE].
12
HE IS PROHIBITED FROM CONSUMING THESE [FIVE SPECIES]; THIS ISTHE OPINION OF R. MEIR. THE SAGES SAY: IF ONE HAS VOWED [TO ABSTAIN] FROM[CONSUMING] DAGAN [CORN], HE IS PROHIBITED FROM [CONSUMING] THESE[SPECIES] ONLY.
13
THEY ARE SUBJECT TO HALLAH AND TITHES.
14
MISHNAH 3. THE FOLLOWING ARE SUBJECT TO HALLAH, BUT EXEMPT FROMTITHES: LEKET,
15
SHIKEHAH,
16
PE'AH,
17
AND PRODUCE, OWNERSHIP OF WHICH HASBEEN WAIVED,
18
AND THE FIRST TITHE
19
OF WHICH TERUMAH [THE PRIEST'SPORTION] HAD BEEN TAKEN OFF,
20
AND THE SECOND TITHE,
21
AND CONSECRATED [PRODUCE]
22
WHICH HAVE BEEN REDEEMED, AND THAT WHICH REMAINS OVERFROM THE OMER,
23
AND GRAIN WHICH HAS NOT GROWN ONE-THIRD [RIPE].
24
R.ELIEZER SAID: GRAIN WHICH HAS NOT GROWN ONE-THIRD [RIPE] IS EXEMPT [ALSO]FROM HALLAH.
25
MISHNAH 4. THE FOLLOWING ARE SUBJECT TO TITHES, BUT EXEMPT FROMHALLAH: RICE, MILLET, POPPY-SEED, SESAMUM, PULSE,
26
AND LESS THANFIVE-FOURTHS [OF A KAB] OF [THE FIVE KINDS OF] GRAIN,
27
SPONGE-BISCUITS,HONEYCAKES,
28
DUMPLINGS,
29
CAKE [COOKED] IN A PAN
30
AND MEDUMMA’
31
AREEXEMPT FROM HALLAH. MISHNAH 5. DOUGH WHICH WAS ORIGINALLY [INTENDED FOR] FANCY-BAKING,
32
AND FINALLY [COOKED AS] FANCY-BAKING, IS EXEMPT FROM HALLAH.
33
[IF ITWAS] ORIGINALLY [ORDINARY] DOUGH, BUT FINALLY [COOKED AS]FANCY-BAKING, [OR IF IT WAS] ORIGINALLY [INTENDED FOR] FANCY-BAKING, BUTFINALLY [COOKED AS ORDINARY] DOUGH, IT IS SUBJECT TO HALLAH; SIMILARLYARE RUSKS
34
SUBJECT [TO HALLAH].
35
MISHNAH 6. THE [FLOUR-PASTE CALLED] ME'ISAH
36
BETH SHAMMAI DECLAREEXEMPT [FROM], BUT BETH HILLEL DECLARE SUBJECT [TO HALLAH].
37
THE[FLOUR-PASTE CALLED] HALITA
38
BETH SHAMMAI DECLARE SUBJECT [TO], ANDBETH HILLEL DECLARE EXEMPT [FROM HALLAH].
39
AS FOR THE LOAVES OF THETHANKSGIVING SACRIFICE
40
AND THE WAFERS OF A NAZIRITE,
41
— IF ONE MADETHEM FOR ONESELF, THEY ARE EXEMPT [FROM HALLAH].
42
[IF ONE MADE THEM] TOSELL IN THE MARKET,
43
THEY ARE SUBJECT [TO HALLAH].
MISHNAH 7. IF A BAKER MADE DOUGH FOR DISTRIBUTING,
44
IT IS SUBJECT TOHALLAH.
45
IF WOMEN GAVE [FLOUR]
46
TO A BAKER TO MAKE FOR THEM DOUGH,
47
— AND IF THERE IS NOT IN THAT WHICH BELONGS TO [ANY] ONE OF THEM THE[MINIMUM] MEASURE,
48
IT
49
IS EXEMPT FROM HALLAH.
50
MISHNAH 8. DOUGH FOR DOGS,
51
AS LONG AS [IT IS SUCH AS] SHEPHERDSPARTAKE THEREOF,
52
IS SUBJECT TO HALLAH;
53
AND ONE MAY MAKE AN ‘ERUB
54
THEREWITH,
55
AND EFFECT A SHITTUF
56
THEREWITH;
55
AND ONE SHOULD SAY THEBLESSINGS FOR [BEFORE
57
AND AFTER
58
EATING] IT, AND ONE SHOULD SAY THEINTRODUCTORY FORMULA TO A CORPORATE RECITAL OF GRACE AFTER IT;
59
AND ITMAY BE COOKED ON A FESTIVAL,
60
AND A PERSON DISCHARGES THEREWITH ONE'SOBLIGATION ON THE PASSOVER;
61
BUT IF [THE DOUGH BE SUCH AS] SHEPHERDS DONOT PARTAKE THEREOF
62
IT IS NOT SUBJECT TO HALLAH;
63
NOR MAY ONE MAKE AN‘ERUB THEREWITH, NOR EFFECT A SHITTUF THEREWITH; NOR SHOULD ONE SAY THEBLESSINGS FOR [BEFORE
64
AND AFTER]
65
IT, NOR SAY THE INTRODUCTORYFORMULA TO A CORPORATE RECITAL OF GRACE AFTER IT;
66
NOR MAY IT BECOOKED ON A FESTIVAL; NOR DOES A PERSON DISCHARGE THEREWITH ONE'SOBLIGATION ON THE PASSOVER. IN EITHER CASE IT IS SUSCEPTIBLE TO RITUALDEFILEMENT AFFECTING FOODSTUFFS.
67
MISHNAH 9. IN THE CASE OF HALLAH AND TERUMAH; ONE IS LIABLE, ONACCOUNT OF [HAVING EATEN] THEM, TO DEATH,
68
OR
69
TO [REPAY] ‘ONE-FIFTH’;
70
AND THEY ARE FORBIDDEN [AS FOOD] TO ‘STRANGERS’,
71
THEY ARE THE PROPERTYOF THE PRIEST;
72
THEY ARE VOID [IF ONE PART OF EITHER IS MIXED] WITHINONE-HUNDRED-AND-ONE [PARTS, THE REST BEING NON-SACRED DOUGH ORPRODUCE];
73
THEY REQUIRE WASHING OF ONE'S HANDS,
74
AND [WAITING UNTIL]THE SETTING OF THE SUN [PRIOR TO EATING THEM];
75
THEY MAY NOT BE TAKENOFF A CLEAN [LOT]
76
FOR [DISCHARGING THE OBLIGATION
77
IN RESPECT ALSO OF]AN UNCLEAN [LOT],
78
AND [ARE NOT TAKEN OFF ONE LOT IN RESPECT ALSO OF ANYOTHER LOT]
79
EXCEPT OF SUCH [LOTS] AS ARE CLOSE TOGETHER,
80
AND FROM SUCHAS ARE [IN A] FINISHED [STATE].
81
IF ONE SAID: ALL MY THRESHING-FLOOR ISTERUMAH, OR ALL MY DOUGH IS HALLAH, HE HAS NOT SAID ANYTHING, UNLESS HEHAS LEFT SOME OVER.
82
____________________
(1)
The law relating to the portion of dough assigned to the priests in accordance with Num. XV, 17-21, . . . When ye eatthe bread of the land . . . of the first of your dough ye shall set apart a cake (hallah) for a gift . . .. Of the first of yourdough ye shall give unto the Lord a portion for a gift throughout your generations.
(2)
V. Kil. I, notes. These species are held to be subject to Hallah because the word
ojk
(bread) is used here and alsoin connection with Passover, ‘bread of affliction’, Deut. XVI, 3. The argument, by gezerah shawah (v. Glos.) is: Since,in the case of Passover,
ojk
obviously implies a cereal capable of becoming leavened, so too does the capacity forleavening determine the liability of produce to hallah.
(3)
Amounting to the minimum subject to hallah. It is only when all of these are mixed together in the flour, or if afterhaving been kneaded separately, they are kneaded together, that this rule applies unconditionally. If, however, thedoughs (each less than the minimum) were kneaded out of various species and later they stuck together (v. infra II. 4)their being deemed as forming one quantity liable to hallah depends on which particular species have been used (v. noteibid).
(4)
V. Lev. XXIII, 14.
(5)
‘This selfsame day’ (ibid.) refers to the day on which the Omer was brought to the Temple. viz., the second day of Passover.
(6)
V. ibid. v. 10ff. The expression ‘The sheaf (Omer) of the first of your harvest’, is taken to imply that the reaping of the Omer must be the first reaping, and that, therefore, there must be no reaping prior thereto, i.e., before Passover. The
analogy between liability to hallah and liability to Hadash (the law relating to ‘new’ sc. produce) is based — by gezerahshawah — on the use of the term
,hatr
‘first’ in the case of hallah (the first of your dough) as well as in the case of new produce (the first of your harvest).
(7)
For harvesting.
(8)
The statutory minimum in matters of this kind.
(9)
Only species which are liable to leaven can, when deliberately prevented from doing so, serve for unleavened breadfor Passover.
(10)
‘Cutting off’, ‘excision’; a punishment by the hand of God as distinct from one by that of man; v. Ex. XII, 19: Forwhosoever eateth that which is leavened, that soul shall be cut off from the Congregation of Israel.
(11)
If he keeps the mixture in his possession during the festival; v. Ibid. XII, 19; XIII. 7.
(12)
A term which, in the opinion of all, denotes only the five species enumerated in Mishnah I.
(13)
because they considered Tebu'ah and Dagan synonymous whereas H. Meir — who was at one with the Sages withregard to the word Tebu'ah — considered Dagan a more comprehensive term including also all seed- and pulse-foodsand held that a man using that term in his vow debarred himself not only from the five species but also from seed- andpulse-foods.
(14)
There are also other species subject to tithes, but the species so far enumerated are subject to both tithes and hallah.The Mishnah proceeds to specify categories which are subject to hallah but not to tithes, and vice-versa.
(15)
Gleanings, v. Lev. XIX, 9.
(16)
The Forgotten, sc. Sheaf. Deut. XXIV, 19.
(17)
The Corner, sc. of the field. Lev. XIX, 9.
(18)
Such waiving of ownership is termed hefker. It is only when the owner declared the produce hefker beforesmoothing the pile of grain that it is exempt from tithing. The Levites were entitled to tithes from commodities belongingto Israelites, in which the former, on account of being Levites, had no share (deduced from Deut. XIV, 29, v. T.J.); butsince the Levites were included among those entitled to help themselves to the produce coming under the categoriesnamed (v. Deut. ibid.). the latter were not subject to being tithed for the benefit of the Levites.
(19)
Assigned to the Levites.
(20)
The terumah which the Levite had to give, a tithe out of the tithe received by him from the Israelite, to the Priests.In Ter. I, 5, a marginal reading is ‘of which terumah had not been taken’, meaning the terumah gedolah due from theIsraelite to the Priest, The case contemplated in our reading is, according to T.J., one in which a Levite took his tithefrom an Israelite whilst the grain was still in ears, and before the ordinary terumah had been taken off. In that event aLevite is bound to give thereof only his terumah (a tithe from the tithe he received) to the priest, but he is not expected togive to the priest anything on account of the terumah which would have accrued to the latter from the Israelite if theLevite had not claimed his tithe so soon. It might have been thought that as the Levite's portion in such a case containedsomething that might be regarded as due to the priest, it would, for that reason, be exempt from hallah; the Mishnahtherefore makes it clear that it is subject thereto.
(21)
Which at the end of the agricultural year was to be taken to Jerusalem and consumed there. In the event of inconvenience through distance, it was to be redeemed and the money spent in Jerusalem on food, drink and anointingoneself, in which case (v. Lev. XXVII, 31) the proceeds of the redemption were to be increased by an amount equal toone-fifth of the eventual sum total, i.e., by one-fourth of the money-value of the tithe. The Mishnah here intimates that inthe event of the second tithe having been separated whilst the corn was in a state when it was not liable to terumah ortithes (viz., when still in ear, v. T. J. and L.) it is exempt from the (first) tithe even after redemption, cf. Terumah I, 5.Such redeemed second tithe is, however, subject to hallah, because the latter is to be taken from the dough, and at thetime of kneading the produce is already hullin (non-sacred).
(22)
Being Temple property, technically termed hekdesh. V. Lev. XXVII, 11-27; cf. infra III, 3.
(23)
In the Omer they offered up one-tenth of an ephah taken from flour made from three se'ah of barley; the remainderof the flour (spoken of here) was redeemed and could thereafter be eaten by anybody, and was therefore subject tohallah. It is, on the other hand, exempt from tithes, because at the material time, i.e., ‘when the pile was made even’ itwas Temple property and thus exempt from tithes.
(24)
T.J. deduces this exemption from Deut. XIV, 22, Thou shalt surely tithe the produce of thy sowing, the argumentbeing: If the sowing has been productive it is to be tithed, if it has not been productive (and if it has resulted in a cropless than one-third ripe it cannot be said to have been productive) it does not require to be tithed. To hallah, however, itis subject because even when only one-third ripe it is capable of leavening (v. supra I, n. 2).
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
More From This User
Notes
Load more
